RNC Chair: All the excitement is on the Republican side

posted at 2:05 pm on January 4, 2012 by Tina Korbe

In an interview with Bloomberg TV, Republican National Chair Reince Priebus countered his Democratic counterpart with a positive spin for Republicans on the Iowa caucuses.

Priebus’ point was simple, but very well taken: It shouldn’t be a cause for concern that Republicans haven’t yet overwhelmingly settled on a nominee — because tough primaries just strengthen the eventual candidate.

“It is a process,” he said. “It is a primary. This is not unusual on both sides of the aisle for that matter. As far as the RNC is concerned, we have a lot to be excited about today. We have voter registration. We are outpacing the Democrats 2-to-1 in Iowa. We had the biggest record turnout last night in the Iowa caucus – over 123,000. While that may not sound like a lot of people, that’s a lot of people for an Iowa caucus. That’s a record. Those are the things I am focused on. That is what we have to do in connecting the dots and making sure we help save this country from a president that has underperformed.”

That sheds a little more light on Debbie Wasserman Schultz’ claim that last night was a “great night” for Democrats. The record turnout alone serves as a potent reminder that Republicans are excited to pick someone to challenge Obama. Meanwhile, on the Democrat side, folks are so disenchanted that they’re still clamoring for a Clinton-Biden swap on the Obama ticket.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

And so the Republican Chair gets on his Sit-n-Spin, only he does a better job of it than Debbie does…

I have zero excitement in this election. I don’t think I’ve ever had any excitement in any election, but then I don’t place my faith in politics or government to determine my interest, emotions or outlook in life.

We had the biggest record turnout last night in the Iowa caucus – over 123,000. While that may not sound like a lot of people, that’s a lot of people for an Iowa caucus.

Which is why the number of conservatives who voted in the 2008 primary to the 2012 primary was about 3,000 (119K to 122K this year). REAL excitement.Let’s not forget the meme being pushed here and every other conservative blog that most of Ron Paul’s voters were actually Dems, and considering how well he did yesterday… I’d have to say there aren’t many excited conservatives voting for a Presidential Candidate.

Iowa is a state that went Dem for 5 of the 6 previous Presidential Elections. They have gay marriage. What else do you want to know that the GOP just won’t win Iowa in 2012?

I venture out to HuffPo once in a while and Obama’s power grab today will sure start closing the excitement gap. The guy announced the appointment on TV, during “recess”, in a battleground state, with the guy standing next to him and with a feisty attitude.

the worst part?
- Only members of the most unpopular congress can respond and will therefore come across as protector of wall street after not wanting to pass tax cuts for the middle class ( so the story will be).
- We have not one presidential candidate — except for Paul – who can take this on without being attacked a la Paul Ryan, and therefore lose.

” … That is what we have to do in connecting the dots and making sure we help save this country from a president that has underperformed.”

I’m so sick of these “Republicans” who are scared shitless of calling Obamuh what he is. He’s not an “underperformer.” He’s not a “progressive.” He’s a Socialist. He’s a Statist. His dream for America is a country whose people are forever on their knees, waiting for a handout from the State. His dream for America is that all Americans shut-up, bow-down, and hand over their earnings to the State. His dream for America is the State … and service to the State.

Until the “Republicans” realize this, and acquire the testicles to express it in a public forum, I will remain a Conservative without a Party.

You won’t get an honest poll on Obama because people don’t want to be called racists because they won’t vote for him, this time around. So they’ll say a lot of things, just that they’re not voting for him. They’ll say they’re still thinking about it, they’re waiting for the Republican field to settle out, they stubbed their left toe going to answer the phone and they’re having a hard time concentrating.

The press can not cover for Obama any more. He has a record and it’s not a good one.

Given that we are facing national bankruptcy within the next four years, I would think that Romney has a good shot at “beating” even Nixon.

Sure it is buddy. You can feel the panic creeping up that somehow after the glorious, yet temporary, reign of the Tea Party, the GOP is about to nominate its most liberal candidate in years, if ever.

inthemiddle on January 4, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Tea Party has always been powerless. Not one thing on their agenda has come even close to getting passed – no Obamacare repeal and no spending cuts. The attempt to anoint Romney as the Republican candidate is likely in part driven by the desire to further marginalize the Tea Party and drive conservatives back to the political wilderness.

I have to say that from most of the comments on this site with the exception of a few makes me wonder why some of you even bother to call yourselves conservative or Republicans. You all talk about how stupid the Republican party is when apparently you are just standing in front of the mirror looking at yourself. To hear all you whiners saying that if their candidate does not make say that they will stay home is naive in the least and moronic at most. Since I can say without a doubt that Paul does not have a chance whoever makes it to the end will get my vote. I think we can use the congress to keep who makes it in check so as to not make any huge blunders that will hurt this country any further. I would prefer anyone except Mitt but would still vote for him if he makes it but will actively oppose him till that point.

Tea Party has always been powerless. Not one thing on their agenda has come even close to getting passed – no Obamacare repeal and no spending cuts. The attempt to anoint Romney as the Republican candidate is likely in part driven by the desire to further marginalize the Tea Party and drive conservatives back to the political wilderness.

Doomberg on January 4, 2012 at 2:39 PM

The Tea Party was doing just fine until it got “excited” and promptly marginalized itself. Look at the polls.

As I’ve said about eighty times on here, if Romney’s the nominee, then I’m out. I’ll vote on the lower level tickets to make sure Cravaack stays in Congress and make sure Klobuchar’s margin of victory remains under 30%, but I’m definitely leaving the top spot blank. And please don’t give me Santorum or Gingrich as “alternatives”; they’re just as bad – I’d say worse – than Romney.

That’s an Republican record. The democrats brought out over 200,000k. People on this site love to say Paul fans aren’t republicans so minus his 20 k votes that mean only around 110k republicans came out. 110,000 vs 200,000

I have to say that from most of the comments on this site with the exception of a few makes me wonder why some of you even bother to call yourselves conservative or Republicans. You all talk about how stupid the Republican party is when apparently you are just standing in front of the mirror looking at yourself. To hear all you whiners saying that if their candidate does not make say that they will stay home is naive in the least and moronic at most. Since I can say without a doubt that Paul does not have a chance whoever makes it to the end will get my vote. I think we can use the congress to keep who makes it in check so as to not make any huge blunders that will hurt this country any further. I would prefer anyone except Mitt but would still vote for him if he makes it but will actively oppose him till that point.

jistincase on January 4, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Have fun voting for four more years of Bush. You may enjoy the wars and bailouts; I sure as hell don’t.

To be fair, all the excitement IS on the Republican, as is all of the frustration. To a large degree however, that is normal. Except in cases where a super star emerges nominees tend to be a compromise between the various factions that make up the respective party.

Unity and excitement tends to come a little later. Heck, even a poor campaigner like McCain was able to generate SOME excitement, despite his poor positions, the economic meltdown, and eight years of Bush.

So I’m not too worried, YET. Eventually the various factions are going to have to call a truce and get excited about the nominee, and usually they have no problem doing that. If they fail to do that, THEN I’ll worry.

As I’ve said about eighty times on here, if Romney’s the nominee, then I’m out. I’ll vote on the lower level tickets to make sure Cravaack stays in Congress and make sure Klobuchar’s margin of victory remains under 30%, but I’m definitely leaving the top spot blank. And please don’t give me Santorum or Gingrich as “alternatives”; they’re just as bad – I’d say worse – than Romney.

Nelsen on January 4, 2012 at 2:46 PM

You seem to have confused the role of your priest with the role of your president.

Now how he will handle them after election and how he will differ from the present administration, I can’t guess. I have more respect for him after reading his book. People who hate him have good reason but haven’t.

I would rather have someone who changes position than a guy who makes a career from mugging his own party; and please don’t mention immigration in light of any 2008 model.

My goal is to end the downward sprial of America. Whether Obama is at the wheel or Romney is at the wheel is irrelevant. Both are big govt statists. Obama is brain cancer. Romney is lung cancer? Which slow and painful death will you choose?

well, i do have to say that having McCain endorse mitt right after the ia caucus does show how tone deaf, out of touch, just flat out wacko the R party is.

he was a horrible standard bearer…i throw up a little in my mouth every time i think about him.

And even tho i’ll vote for Romney…i really have to wonder. We have fruitcakes like RP running. We have a hard socialist in the WH who is looking forward to ruling by himself…freeing himself from the constraints of the Congress and the People

And there are many people who have chosen not to run. why? is it really true that the R are mostly happy with being in Congress…having the protection of a small government job..cozy with their friends and make work stuff they do???

Maybe that’s all they are. Not heros, not fighters, not warriors standing beside the American truth…just functionaries.

barry and his stooges in the press will make sure that by 2016 there’ll be just crumbs to argue over

My goal is to end the downward sprial of America. Whether Obama is at the wheel or Romney is at the wheel is irrelevant. Both are big govt statists. Obama is brain cancer. Romney is lung cancer? Which slow and painful death will you choose?

angryed on January 4, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Politics are a direction, not a goal. With 4 more years of Obama you will have a harder time changing that direction. Oh, and some cancers are easier to cure than others.

The Tea Party was doing just fine until it got “excited” and promptly marginalized itself. Look at the polls.

CaliforniaRefugee on January 4, 2012 at 2:46 PM

How exactly did the Tea party “marginalize” itself? By calling for cuts to government spending? By calling for the repeal of Obamacare? By not stampeding to vote for a liberal candidate who enjoys slapping them in face constantly?

So I’m not too worried, YET. Eventually the various factions are going to have to call a truce and get excited about the nominee, and usually they have no problem doing that. If they fail to do that, THEN I’ll worry.

WolvenOne on January 4, 2012 at 2:49 PM

..oh one of great clarity and logic (NOT meant facetiously), here on HG (ne “HA”) we deal with a universe of a maximum of 1,000-2,000 commenters. Of those, there are approximately 10% max who are insufferable Eeyores and those who would complain of lumbago if you gave them a truckload of gold ingots they had to unload.

These folks hardly are representative of the electorate or even of the the conservative base. (At least those with whom I work, attend meetings with, and labor on campaigns with.)

There are those whom I like a lot but am genuinely concerned about — like angryed — who seem to lead a life steeped in perpetual depressing cynacism. I wish I could generate some measure of cheer in Ed and the others like him but I will probably not be able to.

More’s the pity.

The rest I ignore because it leaves far to little time to read sound, well-reasoned submissions like your very own.

They have gay marriage. What else do you want to know that the GOP just won’t win Iowa in 2012?

RanchTooth on January 4, 2012 at 2:19 PM

I would like to point out that the Iowa legislators nor the citizens voted on that. In fact 3 of the Progressive Judges that forced gay marriage upon the citizens of Iowa were booted out by the citizens. It would have been more, those 3 were the only judges up for affirmation by the citizens. Booting Iowa SC judges is extremely rare, 3 at once was historical. Do not lay that our feet, the other judges that voted on that will be booted also when their day comes. Our SC Judges are appointed by the Governor, thank God in our Iowa Constitution they must be affirmed by the citizens.

How exactly did the Tea party “marginalize” itself? By calling for cuts to government spending? By calling for the repeal of Obamacare? By not stampeding to vote for a liberal candidate who enjoys slapping them in face constantly?

Doomberg on January 4, 2012 at 3:12 PM

Again, look at the polls. That is where marginalization occurs. I didn’t make this up. If you are really wondering how they got marginalized, just look in the mirror. Demanding that people conform to your way of thinking is a really good way. It’s also not good politics.

There are those whom I like a lot but am genuinely concerned about — like angryed — who seem to lead a life steeped in perpetual depressing cynacism. I wish I could generate some measure of cheer in Ed and the others like him but I will probably not be able to.

What else do you want to know that the GOP just won’t win Iowa in 2012?

RanchTooth on January 4, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Sen. Grassley would disagree, as would Rep.Steve King. Tom Latham would question that also. These 3 are not just Republicans they are Conservative. We are about to vote out the flaming Liberal Boswell if he runs again also.

Again, look at the polls. That is where marginalization occurs. I didn’t make this up. If you are really wondering how they got marginalized, just look in the mirror. Demanding that people conform to your way of thinking is a really good way. It’s also not good politics.

CaliforniaRefugee on January 4, 2012 at 3:17 PM

So the ONLY thing you are using as evidence that the Tea Party “marginalized itself” is what, the fact that they’ve gone down in the polls? Two years of relentless MSM attacks might have just had something to do with it.

How did the Tea Partiers “demand” that “others conform with their way of thinking?” The Tea Party is a fiscal conservative movement dedicated to repealing Obamacare, cutting spending, and finding and electing candidates they think will rein in government spending.

Are you confusing/conflating Tea Partiers with social conservatives, or are you just mad they won’t support the coronation of Romney?

Whats the “crisis” going to be. Obama always uses a crisis to forward himself and progressive ideas.
What do you suppose it will be come mid summer?

He can’t run on his record, or the economy or the going Apocalypse of the environment. He’s already used those. Crammed healthcare down everyones throats. The Dems will have to rely on deflection.
What will he set up?
Just curious about what people think.

Again, look at the polls. That is where marginalization occurs. I didn’t make this up. If you are really wondering how they got marginalized, just look in the mirror. Demanding that people conform to your way of thinking is a really good way. It’s also not good politics.

I supported the Tea Party when it started, but of its own volition, it became a confused mess. And yes, once it started demanding political purity tests it lost any hope of attracting anyone who didn’t believe they fit exactly. Marginalization always follows purity tests. Don’t blame the MSM. They did it themselves.

My goal is to end the downward sprial of America. Whether Obama is at the wheel or Romney is at the wheel is irrelevant. Both are big govt statists. Obama is brain cancer. Romney is lung cancer? Which slow and painful death will you choose?

He won’t need a crisis. The economy will be doing well, unemployment will be around 7 to 7.5% and Dow will be 13K+. All he has to do is frame the debate as;stick with me and continue back to prosperity or vote for a Republican Wall St executive (Romney) who will take us back to the days of George W. Bush.

No, I mean it, Ed. I really appreciate what you have to say. You remember the movie Patton? You know that story he tells about the conquering general who rides back into town with his armies and slaves conquered masses ahead of him and the crowds are cheering him ‘n’ stuff.

.and he has a slave riding by his side in his chariot whispering in his ear, “All gory is fleeting, all glory is..”

Oh man, you guys are just outright funny! I would vote for my wife’s cat before I vote for “The One” and I really do not care if it is Rick or Mitt. I just love the statements in the vain of ” I will never vote for Romney or whoever. The only real idiots play is to let “The One” get 4 more years with his wrecking ball. It almost sounds ” If you don’t play by MY rules, I will take my ball and go home!” Childish at best, destruction by idiot power at the least.

He won’t need a crisis. The economy will be doing well, unemployment will be around 7 to 7.5% and Dow will be 13K+. All he has to do is frame the debate as;stick with me and continue back to prosperity or vote for a Republican Wall St executive (Romney) who will take us back to the days of George W. Bush.

angryed on January 4, 2012 at 3:39 PM

While I am in the “Not Romney” camp, you are totally wrong on the economy. We are in deep trouble, and it is getting worse, and all the number games in the world can no longer mask this fact. At this point electing a fiscal conservatism is becoming a matter of national survival – we are probably going to be bankrupt within the next four years (not 20 years down the road, not 10 years down the road) if the current state of affairs is allowed to continue.

If Obama wins, it will be because he collapses Romney’s support base. There will be an unending stream of attacks against Romney, who will be utterly unprepared for them since the MSM has been coddling him to help him build his “electability” argument. A number of commentators have warned this is likely to be the dirtiest campaign in living memory, and Romney will be caught totally flatfooted since most of his strategy depends on being “Mr. Electable,” and you can’t do that if the MSM is bombarding you with negative coverage day in and day out.

It’s possible of course that Obama’s support is so weak, Romney could win anyway, but if there is any Republican right now who could get beaten by Obama, it is probably Mitt Romney. Remember, this is the guy who won Iowa by only 8 votes when he had no effective opposition.

The childish / take ball home argument. Very original. Haven’t heard that one before. Nice of you to ignore all the reasons why Romney would be a horrible president based on his record as governor of MA.

While I am in the “Not Romney” camp, you are totally wrong on the economy. We are in deep trouble, and it is getting worse, and all the number games in the world can no longer mask this fact.

Doomberg on January 4, 2012 at 4:00 PM

I disagree. The economy has definitely been improving the last couple of quarters. I know saying that here is heretical. I look at it objectively. Every conceivable measure shows things are improving…retail sales, unemployment claims, long term unemployment, construction spending, etc. I’m not saying it’s time to party like it’s 1999, but the direction is positive.

And you know very well even the teeniest tiniest bit of good economic numbers will be magnified by the MSM to make Obama look good.

Unless something catastrophic happens in the next 6-9 months, the economy will be humming along nicely by Sept/Oct. Romney will not be able to make the argument that 4 more years of Obama = depression. People will laugh him off the stage.

The childish / take ball home argument. Very original. Haven’t heard that one before. Nice of you to ignore all the reasons why Romney would be a horrible president based on his record as governor of MA.

angryed on January 4, 2012 at 4:08 PM

Worse than Obama? You have to be kidding, right? I really hope that you are. As far as the record, nothing is ever done in a purely ideological vacuum. If I am not mistaken, the MA legislature is 85 percent democratic.